CONGRATS LIBS

Well, the leftists went and did it. They successfully repealed DADT with the help of the usual RINO suspects. Here are the eight traitors:

Brown, Collins, Murkowski, Snowe, Burr, Ensign, Kirk, Voinovich.

Oddly enough, Democrat Senator Joe Manchin failed to vote today. Could it be that he was not to willing to put his stamp of approval on this "historical" legislation today? In reading the liberal posts on the internet, their main point seems to be that this is on par with Truman’s decision to desegregate the military and then the integration of females into the service in the 80’s. Bullshit.

First of all, when blacks were desegregated, a white man and a black man could still find common ground, i.e., women. Consider this, the Gunny, as a white man is standing next to a black man, both of us in the Marines, in say, 1949. A woman walks by and we both are checking her out. We break off the eyeball liberty and our eyes lock for a moment. We both know what we were doing and we laugh about it. Male bonding? That is how camraderie is built, a step at a time. But say, a religious troop is forced to room with a gay troop, is that not reverse discrimination? Is that not legislating for the vast minority at the expense of the majority?

Second of all, the standards have been lowered so far as to be laughable to allow women to succeed in the service. No doubt there are women who have served with distinction but a growing majority never complete their first term, which is a waste of time, money, and resources. Consider this:

"The exodus is particularly unsettling for the Army: A full 47% of its enlisted women are gone, either by choice or involuntarily, before the end of three years, despite having signed up for terms averaging four years."

The average of all of the services combined is 38% of females leaving before their first term is completed.

Top causes of first-term attrition for females:

Substandard performance in initial training: 27%
Medical condition originating before service began: 20%
Pregnancy: 17%
Physical disability: 6%

The cold hard facts is that 4 out of 10 females drop in their first four years. How does that affect deployments? Manning levels? What is the cost to take a female from boot camp, through a service school, then into "the fleet", only to have her take an honorable discharge, say, at the two year mark, for getting pregnant, usually without being married to boot. The cost to take a female from recruitment to a service school is about $35,000. How much has been lost trying to make this work? How deep is this issue being buried by the services in order to prevent the issue from coming to light in this PC world? Remember Jessica Lynch? She was touted as a "hero" by the Lapdog Media, as she was awarded a Bronze Star, proof positive that women could serve in combat. Trouble was, when the truth came out, as it ALWAYS DOES, the story somehow died before it could be reported to America. She was ill-trained, unprepared, got knocked out without firing a shot, likely her weapon was filthy and unusable (Army weapons records were MIA), and the Army whitewashed the whole thing. And when this happens with gays, more whitewash will be applied by the Lapdog Media, and victory will be declared, like the former Soviet Union used to declare their various five-year plans a success, in Pravda newspapers and on other state-controlled media outlets.

Third, the "survey" that Gates and Mullen sent out was not only flawed (many combat units are reporting that they never got it) but the results have been spun by the media.

1. 62% of all service members surveyed expect at least SOME negative results if DADT is repealed.
2. 74% of all Marines and Army combat arms expect serious issues.
3. 82% of Marines in combat arms units foresee issues.
4. Military members stated that if DADT was repealed, those who would bail from the military sooner was SIX TIMES higher than the number who would stay in the military if DADT was repealed. Expect a mass exodus as time progresses and contracts expire. Officers leaving the service as they resign their commissions will be the first step.

Perhaps the most telling number is that 57.5% of all surveyed stated very clearly that repealing DADT would affect "task cohesion" either negatively or "very negatively." Only 9% stated that repealing DADT would have a positive impact. One more point on that survey should be noted. So the problem now is that the military is already having recruiting issues and the Left is repealing a policy that would result in personnel losses to the military, that would outnumber any gains from allowing homosexuals in the ranks.

Oh, the Gunny almost forgot what the Pentagon said in the report (that never made it to the Lapdog Media:

"The majority of views expressed were against repeal." (link at bottom of the page)

So now the military, in doing everything that they have to do to field a first class fighting force, now has to work out the showers and bunking situations. If a straight man has to room with a gay, is that fair? Nope. In fact, it is discrimination. What happens when a gay makes a pass at a straight guy and a fist fight results? Is that now a hate crime? What happens when a Drill Instructors yells at his recruits, "MOVE IT LADIES!" Is that now hate speech because the gay is offended? There are only two winners in this deal, one, the enemies of the United States and the trial lawyers that make up the Democrat Party (100%). The Left can’t even let the troops fight and win without adding this to the mix, i.e., Waxman and Code Pink sending aid to terrorists in Fallujah. The Gunny won't even get into the financial and health care issues which have been discusses at length in other essays.

Did the Pentagon even consider what repealing DADT will do to the military’s mixture of religions? Islam, for example, is staunchly anti-gay so what happens when a Muslim refuses to work with a homo? Who gets punished? More time lost in a bullshit situation created by idiots who have never served a day on active duty. What happens when devout Catholics have to serve with homos, a lifestyle that runs directly against the grain of their religion? It is not like pro-abortionists who can hide that belief in order to get the job done, gays will be openly speaking of and discussing their lifestyle which will offend the majority. Oops, there’s that reverse discrimination thing again. This issue is going to reduce the trust necessary, no, an absolute ingredient in a warfighting unit and when there is no trust, there is a loss of efficiency, mission effectiveness, unit cohesion, and other variables that make a military unit strong. Oh, and speaking of trust, gay troop Manning sure did the US proud, huh?

The eight traitors mentioned above voted along Democrat lines so one has to wonder what the payoff Obama promised them is? Do they get more of our tax dollars looted from the treasury for their states? Lisa Murkowski for one, has her snout so deep in the federal trough, that all one can see is ass sticking up in the air as she feeds. BTW, the Gunny would like to thank the Alaskan Native Corporation for their effort to get RINO Murkowski reelected. Happy now?

So who gets punished if this mess fails? The troops. The nation. Our safety.

Liberals use a bullshit argument when they mewl that "don't ask and don't tell" denies a homosexual a chance to serve in the military. They can serve, they simply cannot tell nor conduct their lives as open homos. How about transsexuals? Do they get to serve? That’ll be attractive, a man, dressed as a woman, in say, Air Force blues, strutting around in public. What an image for the public to consume. Unfortunately for the Left, the truth hurts. The majority of Americans still see gays as a unsatisfactory lifestyle, sorry bout’ that, but it is what it is. What's next, sex changes at your local Naval hospital? Gays couples in Base Housing? Nice. This was done by a lameduck Congress and a corrupt Senate, and will be signed into law by a President who still has yet to provide a valid birth certificate.

At the end of the day, the military is not vehicle for social experimentation because their business IS the killing the enemy, it IS destroying their means to fight, and it IS crushing their will to resist. Secretary Gates is a bought and paid for political hack and Admiral Mullen is a result of the Clinton years and they are a disgrace the offices they hold. Once again, it must be stated that the military was not created with "rights" in mind and those of us who have served KNOW THIS but the social engineers on the Left could care less. The Left is forcing the majority of military to change for the whims of a few as they seek to fix what ain’t broke. Maybe we'll go full circle once we regain our sanity (likely after getting our asses kicked somewhere) and reinstitute the total ban, which worked well enough to produce an ass-kicking military for a century or more. Again, the military exists to fight wars and win them and ANY ISSUE that detracts from that is bad, and that includes throwing out fatbodies, shitbirds, malingerers, drunks, druggies, etc.

"A good moral character is the first essential in a man..." --George Washington

A MUST READ FROM Gen Mundy on KEEPING DADT.
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18602.xml





Read: The Weak Link: The Feminization of the American Military
http://www.armedforcescareers.com/articles/article23.html
http://www.frcblog.com/2010/12/pentagon-report-on-homosexual-policy-buries-the-lead-%E2%80%9Cthe-majority-of-views-expressed-were-against-repeal-%E2%80%9D/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+frcblog+(FRC.org+-+Web+Log)